One of the peculiarities one notices when reading a compliation of Hadith, is the obscure nature of some of these traditions that it contains. For instance:
Narrated Maimuna: The Prophet (ﷺ) ate (a piece of) mutton from the shoulder region and then prayed without repeating the ablution.
وَحَدَّثَنَا أَصْبَغُ، قَالَ أَخْبَرَنَا ابْنُ وَهْبٍ، قَالَ أَخْبَرَنِي عَمْرٌو، عَنْ بُكَيْرٍ، عَنْ كُرَيْبٍ، عَنْ مَيْمُونَةَ، أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم أَكَلَ عِنْدَهَا كَتِفًا، ثُمَّ صَلَّى وَلَمْ يَتَوَضَّأْ.
Sahih al-Bukhari 210
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:210
In isolation, one has to ask who was the chain of individuals who had the epiphany to retain this miscellaneous piece of information. That a companion of the prophet and the other members of the chain of transmission all felt compelled that this was an important piece of information to retain and ensure that future generations were aware that the prophet ate a shoulder of mutton without repeating the ablution before prayer.
To think that Bukhari traveled potentially hundreds of miles to meet the individual who had the honor of retaining this single sentence regarding the action of the prophet. Notice that it has no context, no other piece of information but just this one statement. It is very strange, to say the least. But, if one understands that at the time of the compilation of Bukhari, one question that was debated was whether eating meat broke one’s ablution, then it becomes apparent why this obscure piece of information would be beneficial in this debate. What other motivation is there for retaining this fragment of information without the tedious legal discussion formulated hundreds of years later.
And this isn’t a one-off instance, many Hadith in isolation make absolutely no sense as to why they would be retained, circulated, and attributed, but become obvious when it is understood that these random topics were points of debate and contention among the Muslims during the compilation of this literature. Other legal topics, that have fragmentary Hadith that do not make sense in isolation, are the topics of marriage, etiquette, dietary prohibitions, and numerous other topics.
The fact that much hadith does not make any sense in isolation but only makes sense in later debates or topics of jurisprudence is not what one would expect if the source was authentic and not fabricated at a later date when perfectly aligning with the legal debate raging at the time. Without the motivation for the legal discussion, there is no logical reason someone would pay any special attention to such obscure details, let alone feel the urge to make sure others were aware of this one fact.
Interestingly it doesn’t end there because, for each Hadith that argues one side of a debate, there are also Hadith that state the opposite. So on these obscure topics, there isn’t just a single Hadith, but also fragments of opposing Hadith as well. A good example of this is regarding the proper etiquette for relieving oneself, should one sit or stand, or is one allowed to face the direction of the Qibla or not.
Another oddity that seems very suspect in the compilation of Hadith is that a disproportionate amount of Hadith marked as “authentic” (sahih) often rely on individual narrators who lived long life spans ( mu’ammarun), including a number of centenarians. It could be argued that since these individuals lived longer, it only makes sense that they would narrate more Hadith, but another reason is that including more who lived longer lives will also create a shorter chain of transmitters ( isnads) and therefore be given the illusion of being more reliable.
Evidence for this motivation is that these longer-living narrators appear to be more prolific from Hadith originating in Kufa. The reason for this is that in these areas, the companions of the prophet who resided there died relatively soon after the prophet, e.g., Ibn Masoud, Ibrahim al-Nakhail, Ali, and his family. Therefore they needed to find clever ways to shorten their isnads. Otherwise, their Hadith would not be considered as sound. So it makes no sense as a product of genuine historical transmission as if there were more longer-living ( mu’ammarun) in Kufah but makes perfect sense as a reflection of the specific Kufan needs to compensate for the creation of straightforward and especially short islands.
The historian G. H. A. Juynboll wrote an article on this subject entitled “The Role of Mu’ammarun,” which covers the extremely long-lived people who are inserted into chains to close gaps in Hadith transmission. In short, are we to believe that Hadith transmitters just happened to coincide with many people who lived for 100+ years? Or is it more likely that individuals who wanted to provide more validity to the Hadith they support inserted these individuals into their chains to close the gaps and shorten their isnads?
Many Hadith contradict earlier Islamic and non-Islamic literary sources and even some proto-Islamic and pre-Islamic archaeological remains. The most obvious indication of this is the rampant contradiction between the Hadith to the Quran. The Quran shows that all the battles the prophet partook in were defensive measures, as the Quran promotes the non-aggression principle. Yet, the Hadith depicts the prophet and the believers as waging numerous acts of aggression.
Another example that conflicts with non-Islamic accounts is the depiction of the religion of the Arabs at the time of the prophet. The historical accounts and archeological records show that, for the most part, they were monotheistic in faith and not the flaming statue worshipers as depicted in the Hadith. This is also consistent with the depiction in the Quran. We see numerous accounts that, from a surface level, the Arabs of that time did believe in God. They did view themselves as monotheistic, but the Quran is calling out that their actual belief is that of idol worshipers who gave power to entities aside from God despite what they said with their lips.
29:61 If you ask them, “Who created the heavens and the earth, and put the sun and the moon in your service,” they will say, “GOD.” Why then did they deviate?
29:63 If you ask them, “Who sends down from the sky water, to revive dead land,” they will say, “GOD.” Say, “Praise GOD.” Most of them do not understand.
Additionally, Muhammad himself is not even found in much of the religious literature except for his four mentions in the Quran until the reign of Abd al-Malik (d. 705 CE) in the inscription at the Dome of the Rock, which he constructed in Jerusalem during the Second Fitna (691-692 CE). This shows that for much of the early history after the prophet’s death, his sayings and actions were not a major emphasis of the religion or utilized to settle religious disputes.
#15. Orality Means Less Precision in Transmission (2HR 21Min)
Oftentimes upholders of Hadith boast about the superior memory of the people in the past. They claim that the people at the time of the prophet and the next couple of generations did not require things to be written because of their superhuman ability to memorize what they heard. Historically such claims have been proven to be false. The field of oral studies has disproven the traditional idea that oral transmission in traditional societies is highly reliable.
Experiments have shown that the reason oral cultures perceive they have better recollection is that they do not have a written control on which to base their recollection against. Memory studies show how poor an average person’s memory truly is and how memory is not meant to “record’ what happened in the past but rather it constructs and reconstructs an event based on the individual’s understanding at the time or recall. In other words, memory is about meaning-making and meaning-construction and is highly malleable. This is why eyewitness testimony has been proven in study after study to be highly unreliable and susceptible to contamination.
Historians have shown that even the so-called mass-transmitted, mutawātir (متواتر) Hadith are not reliable. Muslims intuitively understand this, when it comes to Christianity and claims about Jesus’s resurrection, but think that early Muslims were somehow different. Some people point this to the memorization of the Quran, but this is not an accurate comparison because there was always a written Quran in conjunction with the oral recitation that served as a control to the oral recitation. Therefore, oral memory works when there is systematic control via scholarship, writings, institutions, and checks and balances. This was not the case for the Hadith corpus.
By its nature, oral transmission always maintains a level of fluidity where synonyms are used and things are omitted or altered. An example of this is the 5,734 Hadith that Abu Hurairah supposedly narrated from the prophet despite only being with him for no more than a couple years, in a limited capacity at that. Some individuals push back on this argument and claim Abu Hurayra echoed what he heard other companions state. If that is the case, then since he does not specify that he did not hear it directly from the prophet, he is firstly bearing false witness. Secondly, it shows that the Hadith is missing crucial information about the true chain of transmitters.
Another example of this can be seen in the various Hadith regarding the believer’s testimony of faith, the Tashahhud ( تَشَهُّد). Despite the Hadith stating that this was taught to companions by the prophet as if it was the verses of the Quran, there are various narrations stating this proclamation, each different from the other.
This fluidity in oral transmission also becomes particularly problematic because traditionalists consider Hadith to be divine revelation, wahi ( وَحْي), and therefore a source of religious decree. This is at odds with the requirements of laws that need to be concrete. Laws have to be very specific, where the specific words, punctuation, and grammar can be analyzed and dissected. But a law that is fluid is simply, at best, a guideline and cannot be considered a decree. It cannot be used as law because there is no certainty to the exact words that were stated, not to mention the exact context by which it was conducted.
But there is another major factor that can impact the reliability of oral tradition, which is that much of our memory is influenced by our current environment. After the prophet’s death, the Muslims experienced a rapidly changing environment, mass migration, civil wars, famines, fights, and, eventually, vast wealth. All these factors have a major impact on memory and how individuals recall how events transpired or what specifically was stated at a time in the distant past. This is because the people’s needs and interests were rapidly changing, which impacted how they perceived past events. Historians are well aware that when oral societies go through such rapid change, it has severe impacts on their recollection of their history, and it would be naive to think that Muslim society is any different than the number of other societies that have gone through the same thing.
Oftentimes people equate Hadith as an elaborate game of telephone, and many traditionalists object to this comparison, but Dr. Little, during this portion, says that in actuality, such comparisons are not far off. This is because Hadith contain extreme variations of the same events. For example, the infamous Hadith of the prophet prohibiting something for himself just to please his wives, as stated in verse one of Sura 66: Prohibition, Al-Tahreem ( الـتحريم). According to Hadith literature, this is either regarding the prophet forbidding honey or sexual intercourse with one of his wives.
In addition, we have the supposed sermon given at what is known as The Farewell Pilgrimage, Ḥijjatu Al-Wadāʿ ( حِجَّة ٱلْوَدَاع), in the Islamic year 10 AH, following the Conquest of Mecca. Not only do the various narrations vary, but a very crucial statement is completely up for debate. Pending on whose compilation one accepts the prophet made one of four possible statements:
“I left for you what if you hold up to, you will never be misguided, the book of God.”
Sahih Muslim 1218a
Al-Jahiz in the Kitāb al-Bayān wa-al-Tabyīn
Musnad of Imam Ahmad (hadith no.19774)
Mishkat al-Masabih 2555
Sunan Abi Dawud 1905
“I left for you what if you hold up to, you will never be misguided, the book of God and my Family, the people of the house.”
Jami` at-Tirmidhi 3786
“I left for you what if you hold up to, you will never be misguided, the book of God and my Sunnah.”
Ibn Ishaq, as quoted in Ibn Hisham’s Sirah an-Nabawiyah
“I enjoin you to fear Allah, and to hear and obey (your leaders) even if it be an Abyssinian (Ethiopian) slave, for those of you who live after me will see great disagreement. You must then follow my Sunnah and that of the rightly-guided caliphs.”
Jami` at-Tirmidhi 2676
Sunan Ibn Majah 42
Sunan Abi Dawud 4607
Riyad as-Salihin 157
This may seem trivial to outsiders, but to any adherent of the religion, which statement the prophet actually said, if any, has major ramifications in the entire understanding of the religion. Regarding the claim of “my Sunnah” or “the rightly-guided caliphs,” this also touches on point #9, where this word in the Quran is never used to refer to the actions of the prophet, so would be anachronistic that this is something he actually stated. Funny enough, in the narration from Abi Dawud 4607 and the other narrations that mention the rightly guided caliphs, the Hadith states that the prophet said:
“And avoid matters of Hadith, for every Hadith is an innovation, and every innovation is a misguidance.”
Many Hadith about the prophet follow traditional themes or formulas in literature. These archetypes and narratives are more indicative of storytelling than history. Hadith regarding the debate between Moses and Adam blaming each other for their people going astray. Hadith about Moses having his clothes stolen by a rock or his fight with the angel of death, or the prophet wrestling with Satan. Or the numerous Hadith about the miracles of the prophet e.g., endless amounts of food and water for the masses, the fact that he did not need food or drink because God fed him, or that he could see behind his head.
#18. Product of Popular Storytelling (2HR 37Min)
If these are stories, then there is no reason to think they are truthful.
#19. Exegesis Pretending to be History (2HR 40Min)
The Hadith, claim to be historical reports but are actually treated as if they are exegesis, critical explanations or interpretations of the Quran. The typical argument is that the Quran is the law, and the Sunnah is the application of the law, so they treat the Hadith as exegesis in disguise. So individuals are trying to match a certain narrative with some understanding of the religion. The irony is that there are Hadith where the prophet says he should not be viewed in such ways as he is only human and prone to shortcomings.
‘Abdullah (b. Mas’ud) reported: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) led us five (rak’ahs in prayer). We said: Messenger of Allah, has the prayer been extended? He said: What is the matter? They said: You have said five (rak’ahs). He (the Holy Prophet) said: Verily, I am a human being like you. I remember as you remember and I forget just as you forget. He then performed two prostrations as (compensation of) forgetfulness.
Sahih Muslim 572k
https://sunnah.com/muslim:572k
See also: https://sunnah.com/muslim:572l
Rafi’ b. Khadij reported that Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) came to Medina, and the people had been grafting the trees. He said: What are you doing? They said: We are grafting them, whereupon he said: It may perhaps be good for you if you do not do that, so they abandoned this practice (and the date-palms) began to yield less fruit. They made a mention of it (to the Holy Prophet), whereupon he said: I am only a human being, so when I command you about a thing pertaining to religion, do accept it, and when I command you about a thing out of my personal opinion, then I am only a human being. ‘Ikrima reported that he said something like this.
Narrated Um Salama: Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) said, “I am only a human being, and you people (opponents) come to me with your cases; and it may be that one of you can present his case eloquently in a more convincing way than the other, and I give my verdict according to what I hear. So if ever I judge (by error) and give the right of a brother to his other (brother) then he (the latter) should not take it, for I am giving him only a piece of Fire.”
حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مَسْلَمَةَ، عَنْ مَالِكٍ، عَنْ هِشَامٍ، عَنْ أَبِيهِ، عَنْ زَيْنَبَ ابْنَةِ أَبِي سَلَمَةَ، عَنْ أُمِّ سَلَمَةَ ـ رضى الله عنها ـ أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ “ إِنَّمَا أَنَا بَشَرٌ، وَإِنَّكُمْ تَخْتَصِمُونَ إِلَىَّ، وَلَعَلَّ بَعْضَكُمْ أَنْ يَكُونَ أَلْحَنَ بِحُجَّتِهِ مِنْ بَعْضٍ فَأَقْضِي نَحْوَ مَا أَسْمَعُ، فَمَنْ قَضَيْتُ لَهُ بِحَقِّ أَخِيهِ شَيْئًا فَلاَ يَأْخُذْهُ، فَإِنَّمَا أَقْطَعُ لَهُ قِطْعَةً مِنَ النَّارِ ”.
Sahih al-Bukhari 7169
https://sunnah.com/bukhari:7169
Additionally, even the Hadith that are meant to be straight tafsir ( تفسير), and not extrapolations, contain numerous contradictions. Open the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir, which is riddled with conflicting hadith attempting to explain the meaning of words and verses, sometimes from the same supposed transmitter. As we reviewed in a previous article with Ibn Kathir’s understanding of the meaning of Nun ( نون) in Sura 68 verse 1. The example that Dr. Little cited in the interview was from Sura 74, verses 50 and 51, and the conflicting narrations to what is the meaning of the word “ qaswaratin” ( قَسْوَرَةٍ). Pending on the Hadith, it can mean a lion, wolf, hunters, group of men, archers, or human voices. As if that isn’t problematic enough, most of these narrations are attributed to the same person Ibn Abbas who claimed all these different definitions came from the prophet himself.
74:50 Running like zebras.
74:51 Who are fleeing from the lion!
So rather than thinking the prophet had no clue and had or no problem changing his mind about what this meant, a more likely scenario is that some people looked at the verse, then came up with an understanding and fabricated a Hadith to support their understanding. So again, this points to the likeliness that much of the Hadith was created post facto later and did not originate from the prophet himself.
#20. Quranic Amnesia: Discontinuity Between Quranic Milieu (2HR 43Min)
As touched on before, there is a recurring theme of the Hadith conflicting with the Quran. Dr. Little describes this as Quranic amnesia, where there is a discontinuity between the verses of the Quran and the grander implications compared to what is described in the Hadith literature. The example that he cited is the blatant disconnect between the Hadith understanding of Sura 112, Absoluteness, Al-Ikhlaas ( الإخلاص), and the connection with the rebuttal this serves to the Nicene Creed and the Trinity Doctrine. The Hadith literature is completely silent in regard to this connection.
[112:0] In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful
112:1 Proclaim, “He is the One and only GOD.
112:2 “The Absolute GOD.
112:3 “Never did He beget. Nor was He begotten.
112:4 “None equals Him.”
There is no effective method for determining strong and weak Hadith. The reasoning as to why a Hadith was accepted or rejected by the compilers was completely arbitrary if the sole objective was historical accuracy. This is because compilers made personal judgments regarding their stance on a topic and who they collect from, let alone what portion of the Hadith they choose to retain. Bukhari was infamous for cherry-picking portions of narrations. Hadith collectors would reject narrations if it went against their understanding which was impacted heavily by their local traditional biases.
Additionally, the metric they applied by their own standard was the person’s supposed level of piety. This is problematic on multiple fronts. Firstly, how difficult is it to determine the piety of people in one’s own community. For instance, consider that among the prophet, there were hypocrites that he was not aware of.
9:101 Among the Arabs around you, there are hypocrites. Also, among the city dwellers, there are those who are accustomed to hypocrisy. You do not know them, but we know them. We will double the retribution for them, then they end up committed to a terrible retribution.
Secondly, if that isn’t difficult enough, imagine trying to determine the piety of someone who lived over one hundred to two hundred years ago.
Using corroborating evidence would only work after creating a rigorous process by credible institutions and would not work for determining credibility before these were established and abided by. This is why for the most part, after the 9th century, we have fairly good historical records, but prior to that, we have a hodgepodge of conflicting narratives. So the horse has already left the barn, and not much can be done to salvage these accounts after the fact.
Summary
In conclusion, Dr. Little summarizes that the Hadith serves one primary function for historians, in that they provide a glimpse of miscellaneous topics that the people during the compilation were discussing. Aside from that, all Hadith should be presumed to be unreliable until proven otherwise, and based on the 21 points already mentioned, it is hard to presume how that could be possible.
But even if we conceded that there may be some kernel that goes back to the prophet, it is impossible to determine anything with certainty. Now contrast this with the Quran.
2:2 This scripture therein there is no doubt; a guidance for the righteous;
39:23 GOD has revealed herein the best Hadith; a book that is consistent, and points out both ways (to Heaven and Hell). The skins of those who reverence their Lord cringe therefrom, then their skins and their hearts soften up for GOD’s message. Such is GOD’s guidance; He bestows it upon whomever He wills. As for those sent astray by GOD, nothing can guide them.
39:29 GOD cites the example of a man who deals with disputing partners (Hadith), compared to a man who deals with only one consistent source (Quran). Are they the same? Praise be to GOD; most of them do not know.
6:112 We have permitted the enemies of every prophet—human and jinn devils—to inspire in each other fancy words, in order to deceive. Had your Lord willed, they would not have done it. You shall disregard them and their fabrications.
6:113 This is to let the minds of those who do not believe in the Hereafter listen to such fabrications, and accept them, and thus expose their real convictions.
6:114 Shall I seek other than GOD as a source of law, when He has revealed to you this book fully detailed?* Those who received the scripture recognize that it has been revealed from your Lord, truthfully. You shall not harbor any doubt.
6:115 The word of your Lord is complete,* in truth and justice. Nothing shall abrogate His words. He is the Hearer, the Omniscient.
6:116 If you obey the majority of people on earth, they will divert you from the path of GOD. They follow only conjecture; they only guess.
6:117 Your Lord is fully aware of those who stray off His path, and He is fully aware of those who are guided.